Modeling the potential future scenarios of buildings' energy carrier mix and energy consumption levels plays a crucial role in comprehending and strategizing for decarbonization pathways. It is imperative to compare the results obtained from different models to understand their specific characteristics and ensure unbiased analysis. However, conducting effective model comparisons can be challenging when scenario specifications are not standardized and comparable. In order to address this issue, a comprehensive scenario specification and model run task were undertaken as part of the ECEMF project [1]. This task involved the formulation of seven distinct scenarios, designed to represent a spectrum of high and low demand levels and different technology focuses. To assess the outcomes of these scenarios, multiple building stock models, namely Invert/EELab [2], Invert/Opt [2], FORECAST-Buildings [3], PRIMES-Buildings [4], and REMIND-Buildings [5], were employed to simulate the various scenarios. By conducting this comparative analysis across multiple models, a more robust understanding of the potential decarbonization pathways of the building sector can be achieved. Furthermore, the primary objective of this study was to analyze and evaluate the different options available for decarbonizing the energy demand in buildings, specifically focusing on the comparison between electrification and other potential strategies. The paper deals with the following research questions: What are the key factors contributing to the disparities observed among the various models in decarbonization scenarios of the EU building sector? Furthermore, what are the shared insights and reliable findings that emerge across the range of scenarios examined?